1415: Henry V's Year of Glory

by Mortimer, Ian

  71. Neither of these payments to Henry Scrope on this roll can relate to his embassy in 1413, for which he was reimbursed in the same year. (See Wylie, Henry V, i, pp. 149–50.) The duke of Orléans was in communication with Henry in late 1414, granting safe conducts to Henry’s messengers and sending his own chamberlain in November 1414. That November the duke of Burgundy also sent his chamberlain to Henry – it is possible that Scrope’s second voyage relates to these further negotiations with Burgundy. See Wylie, Henry V, i, pp. 415–16; Foedera, ix, p. 179.

  72. The ‘une’ does not necessarily relate to a female form of ‘one’, as spelling of French words, like English, had yet to be standardised. The quotation comes from the Iliad, ii, lines 204–5.

  73. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 217–18.

  74. Monstrelet, i, p. 325.

  75. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 56; Foedera, ix, p. 203.

  76. Wylie, Henry IV, iii, p. 395.

  77. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 221.

  78. HKW, ii, pp. 988–1000. Sutton House followed, in April 1415. See ibid., p. 1004.

  79. Dugdale, Monasticon, vi, p. 29.

  80. Wylie, Henry V, i, pp. 230–1.

  81. Dugdale, Monasticon, vi, pp. 542–3. For the two-storey church, see ibid., p. 541, quoting Weever.

  82. Dugdale, Monasticon, vi, p. 542 (dimensions); HKW, i, p. 265 (brickmakers).

  83. Johnes (ed.), Monstrelet, i, pp. 323–5 (where this is dated to the 24th); Vaughan, John the Fearless, pp. 203–4; Curry, Agincourt, p. 47. See also de Baye, ii, p. 210 n. 1, where it is dated to the 23rd.

  84. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 445.

  85. Wylie, Henry V, i, pp. 90–3.

  86. Issues, p. 339.

  87. Luard (ed.), Flores Historiarum, iii, p. 193; CCR 1327–30, p. 4. I am grateful to Kathryn Warner for drawing my attention to these references to Burgoyne.

  88. Markham, Court of Richard II, p. 33. This site may also have been used by earlier kings as a retreat. See CCR 1327–30, p. 4.

  89. HKW, i, p. 245.

  90. E 101/620 (last membrane).

  91. Issues, p. 340. This item was on a membrane which is detached from E 101/620.

  92. Issues, p. 340.

  March

  1. Vaughan, John the Fearless, pp. 211–12.

  2. Loomis, Constance, pp. 218–19.

  3. Dugdale, Monasticon, vi, p. 542. This translation has been smoothed somewhat. The exact text is Haec omnia ad sedulae considerationis examen, inspirante supernam gratiam, in cujus manu sunt regum corda, et testante scriptura, ‘ubi voluerit inclinabit’.

  4. Fox, Acts and Monuments, p. 840; Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 286.

  5. Grime, Lanterne of Lyght (1535), fol. ix recto. With regard to the earlier quotations, these have been taken from Fox, Acts and Monuments, p. 841 and have not been checked in the 1535 edition.

  6. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 289.

  7. Spinka (ed.), Letters of John Hus, pp. 148–9.

  8. CPR, p. 288. Temporalities were restored to him on 16 March (Syllabus, ii, p. 584).

  9. E 403/621. See under 1 May. The journey would have entailed three days’ travelling each way – the distance to Southampton was 75 miles. Henry may have left in the last week of February and spent several days in Southampton, returning in time to visit the Londoners on the 10th.

  10. Riley (ed.)¸ Memorials, p. 603.

  11. Loomis (ed.), Constance, p. 115.

  12. Part of this table is preserved on the wall of the undercroft of the hall, in what is now known as the Conciergerie, Paris.

  13. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 440.

  14. Curry, Agincourt, p. 45; Johnes (ed.), Monstrelet, i, pp. 325–6.

  15. Foedera, ix, pp. 210–12.

  16. Foedera, ix, pp. 212–13.

  17. Issues, p. 340.

  18. E 403/621.

  19. Foedera, ix, pp. 213–14.

  20. Curry, Agincourt, p. 50.

  21. Loomis (ed.), Constance, p. 220.

  22. Riley (ed.), Memorials, pp. 604–5; Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 454.

  23. Hutton, Rise and Fall, p. 20.

  24. Loomis (ed.), Constance, p. 490.

  25. Foedera, ix, p. 215. However, it wrongly named Simon Flete as Richard Clitherowe’s companion, not Reginald Curteis as it should have done. Curteis and Clitherowe had received the money in February; the commission was correctly issued in their name on 4 April (Foedera, ix, pp. 216–17).

  26. CCR, p. 176.

  27. CPR, p. 294.

  28. CCR, p. 162.

  29. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 222, 491.

  30. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 223.

  31. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 117, 222.

  32. Fears, p. 221. The ‘royal predecessors’ were named as Edward III, the Black Prince, Richard II or John of Gaunt.

  33. CCR, pp. 268, 270; Foedera, ix, p. 216; Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 454.

  34. CPR, p. 308.

  35. Hutton, Rise and Fall, pp. 20–1.

  36. CPR, p. 321.

  37. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 223–5.

  38. This date is an estimate. It took Warwick ten weeks to reach Constance in winter but it took Caterick five weeks to return in summer. Six weeks has been allowed for the most important members of the embassy to return. They were back by 11 May.

  39. Hutton, Rise and Fall, p. 21.

  40. CPR, p. 307.

  41. CPR, p. 321.

  42. Hutton, Rise and Fall, p. 21.

  43. Mortimer, ‘Henry IV’s date of birth and the royal Maundy’, pp. 567–76, esp. 572; Fears, p. 371. This concludes that Maundy Thursday (15 April 1367) was Henry IV’s date of birth. Christopher Fletcher, apparently unfamiliar with this work, has subsequently suggested 16 March 1367, which appears in a late-fifteenth-century redaction of the chronicle of John Somer. See Fletcher, Richard II, p. 1, n. 4

  44. E 101/406/21 fol. 19r.

  45. The first move towards cramp rings to cure epilepsy occurs in the reign of Edward II, in 1323. See Ormrod, ‘Personal Religion of Edward III’, p. 864.

  46. E 101/406/21 fol. 19r.

  47. Hutton, Rise and Fall, pp. 22–3.

  48. Nicolas (ed.), Privy Council, ii, p. 149.

  49. English Historical Documents, p. 208.

  50. Marx (ed.), An English Chronicle 1377–1461, p. 42; Brie (ed.), Brut, ii, pp. 374–5. See also Illustrious Henries, p. 129.

  51. Given-Wilson (ed.), Usk, p. 253.

  52. Chronica Maiora, p. 399.

  53. Sacrosancta has been described as ‘probably the most revolutionary official document in the world’. See Spinka, John Hus at at the Council of Constance, p. 64.

  54. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 227–8.

  55. Hutton, Rise and Fall, pp. 23–5.

  56. E 101/406/21.

  57. Hutton, Rise and Fall, p. 26.

  April

  1. Hutton, Rise and Fall, p. 26.

  2. CPR, p. 327. This was assigned to be paid by the abbot and convent of St Peters Gloucester, receivers of a royal manor worth £48, on 11 June. See CCR, p. 219.

  3. CPR, p. 328.

  4. For example, the meetings of 10 April and 27 May. The only council meeting which Clarence attended in the first half of the year seems to have been the great council of 15–18 April.

  5. Issues, p. 340.

  6. Cal. Charter Rolls, pp. 479–80. Although the terms of the charter had no doubt been established some days or even weeks earlier, it is noticeable that the necessary arrangements for funding the priory were also dated today (e.g. the compensation grants paid to Queen Joan and Sir John Rothenhale), so this was a key date in Henry’s religious programme.

  7. CPR, p. 340. These sums had been allocated to her in lieu of her dower.

  8. CPR, p. 372.

  9. HKW, i, p. 266.

  10. Cal. Charter Rolls, pp. 479–80; Dugdale, Monasticon, vi, pp. 29–34; Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 216.

  11. CPR, pp. 395, 380. The site is not specified as the Celestine one but the measurements and location allow us to compare it to the Syon A
bbey site. Both were about thirty-one acres (give or take an acre) and had a common boundary, so seem to have been one site divided in half. Both sites were bordered by the north bank of the Thames and Twickenham field. The grant of several alien priories’ estates along with the triangular site described in this grant (and the subsequent identical one of 29 July) is further evidence that this site was that of the planned Celestine foundation. See also HKW, p. 266.

  12. Wylie, Henry V, i, pp. 230–1.

  13. They departed with the French envoys in July. See Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 231; HKW, p. 266.

  14. For a description of Jerome see Loomis (ed.), Constance, p. 135.

  15. Loomis (ed.), Constance, p. 131.

  16. CPR, p. 296.

  17. Foedera, ix, pp. 216–17.

  18. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 119–20.

  19. Foedera, ix, p. 217; CPR, p. 298.

  20. Nine weeks had passed since John XXIII’s confirmation of Patrington’s election. This compares with Richard Beauchamp’s ten weeks travelling to Constance. In the dark of winter it would appear to have been a hard journey, travelling an average of about sixty miles a week.

  21. Loomis (ed.), Constance, p. 229.

  22. Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, p. 503.

  23. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 452; Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, pp. 501–5.

  24. Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, p. 501.

  25. CCR, p. 268.

  26. E 101/406/21 fol. 5v.

  27. Kirby (ed.), Signet Letters, p. 161. Kirby suggests the ambassadors who had returned with the cup were Sir John Colvyle and Richard Hals, who had returned in December 1414. A delay of four months before writing to acknowledge a diplomatic gift seems unlikely. It is possible that John Chamberlain returned with it, given his appearance in the February 1415 Issue Rolls. However, that mission too was some months earlier.

  28. Riley (ed.), Memorials, p. 606.

  29. Rawcliffe, Medicine and Society, pp. 120–1.

  30. CPR, p. 342.

  31. CCR, pp. 206–7. These were actually granted on the 8th; they are mentioned here so they may be connected more directly with Henry’s instructions.

  32. Syllabus, ii, p. 584; CPR, p. 342; Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 454.

  33. These payments appear on the Issue Roll E 403/621 under 27 April.

  34. Nicolas (ed.), Privy Council, ii, pp. 153–4.

  35. Foedera, ix, pp. 225–7; Wylie, i. p. 453.

  36. Foedera, ix, p. 219–20.

  37. Nicolas (ed.), Privy Council, ii, p. 155 (place of meeting); Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 496, n. 1 (Star Chamber).

  38. See Nicolas (ed.), Privy Council, ii, p. 156; or Foedera, ix, p. 222, for a printed list of those present. Although these minutes locate this meeting to 16 April, the correct date was the 15th. See Appendix 2.

  39. Fears, pp. 368–9.

  40. ODNB.

  41. ‘To Richard of York [Richard of Conisborough], son of the late Edmund, duke of York, to whom Richard II gave 350 marks yearly, on top of the £100 he receives yearly …’ to be paid until the king can find a means to support ‘his young relative’. He received £285 before 5 Dec. 1414 (Issues, p. 337).

  42. ODNB, under Richard, earl of Cambridge.

  43. See Appendix Two.

  44. Nicolas (ed.), Privy Council, ii, p. 151.

  45. Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, p. 507.

  46. Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, p. 509.

  47. Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, p. 511.

  48. Gesta, p. 17. See also Curry, Agincourt, p. 55. Curry’s comment on this point that ‘the truth of this remark is not certain’ may be applied to most other chroniclers’ remarks throughout history. It is of course possible that this element of the Issue Rolls was only supplied at a later date by a clerk who interpreted the payment in this way, but even so there is plenty of independent evidence of sending ambassadors via Harfleur, the naval base, which does suggest spying. There seems little room for doubt that there was deliberate ambiguity about the destination of the expedition at this juncture.

  49. Perfect King, Appendix Five, pp. 422–6.

  50. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 138.

  51. See Barker, Agincourt, pp. 175–6 for a neat summary of the strategic advantages.

  52. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 404. For Bourchier, Phelip and Porter, see above under 24 January and 13 March.

  53. Nicolas (ed.), Privy Council, ii, pp. 157–8.

  54. HKW, ii, p. 1004; CPR, p. 346.

  55. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 231–2.

  56. Loomis (ed.), Constance, p. 233. ‘Cory’ has been corrected to ‘Corfe’.

  57. Nicolas (ed.), Privy Council, ii, p. 158.

  58. Foedera, ix, p. 223. The number of archers seems to have been revised to sixty by 23 May. See ibid., p. 250. He was paid for sixty archers, according to the enrolled account E 358/6; by the time of Agincourt he was down to 35. Note: the earldom of Huntingdon had been forfeit by Sir John Holland’s father in 1400. Sir John was not formally restored until 1417, when he came of age. However, most contemporary sources – e.g. the Gesta, and the May council minutes – refer to him as the earl of Huntingdon. This official indenture for the campaign also names him as an earl. Hence this title has been used in this book.

  59. CPR, p. 329.

  60. CPR, p. 342.

  61. Oliver, Monasticon Exonienses, p. 248.

  62. Loomis (ed.), Constance, p. 131.

  63. CPR, p. 306.

  64. Henry did not necessarily leave it to the last minute to go to Windsor. The reference to him and the council being at Westminster on 21 April may be an enrolment of a decision made some days earlier.

  65. For the date of foundation, see Perfect King, Appendix Six, pp. 427–9.

  66. This list is drawn from CP, ii, pp. 537–9 and Belz, Memorials, pp. 399–400. The order of seating is based on those of 1406, 1408 and 1409, coupled with the order of succession to each seat recorded in CP. Where there are discrepancies (the seats of Fitzhugh, Umphraville and Cornwaille) the CP order of succession is preferred. For the two tables marked with their names in French see Belz, ix.

  67. Namely Henry V, Clarence, Gloucester, York, Arundel, Dorset, Salisbury, Talbot, Fitzhugh, Scrope, Morley, Camoys, Felbrigg, Erpingham, Cornwaille, Daubridgecourt.

  68. Hutton, Rise and Fall, p. 27.

  69. There was no cap at this time. See Belz, Memorials, p. lii.

  70. PROME inventory no. 1091.

  71. PROME, 1423 October, item 31, nos 139, 146, 163, 169 and 170.

  72. PROME, 1423 October, item 3, no. 264.

  73. The ladies who were issued robes in 1413 were the dowager queen of England, the duchesses of Clarence and York, the dowager duchess of York, the countesses of Huntingdon, Westmorland, Dorset, Arundel and Salisbury, the dowager countess of Salisbury, Lady Beauchamp, Lady Ros and Lady Waterton. See Belz, Memorials, lv. Most of these had been issued robes in earlier years and were issued them again in later years, so they constituted a group of Ladies of the Garter. See CP, ii, pp. 591–6.

  74. Belz, Memorials, ix. In later years these tables were exhibited in the chapel at Windsor – but they were sadly dilapidated by the seventeenth century, and were subsequently destroyed.

  75. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 233–4.

  76. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 234–5.

  77. Foedera, ix, pp. 225–7.

  78. Petit, Itinéraires, pp. 417–8.

  79. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 235–6.

  80. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 447.

  81. de Baye, p. 231, n. 1.

  82. Bellaguet (ed.), Chronique du Religieux, v, p. 511.

  83. Barker, Agincourt, p. 98, tries to clarify the total number of ships employed by taking the total paid to Clitherowe and Curteys (£5,050) and dividing it by a 2s per quarter-ton rate of hire. The result of 631 ships of ‘twenty tons’ seems to accord with a contemporary report that there were seven hundred ships hired from Holland. However,
there are two problems. The first is that not all of the £5,050 was paid for the hire of ships; as this entry in the Issue Rolls makes clear, the £2,166 13s 4d paid on this date was for wages. The second problem is that references to ‘ships of twenty/sixty/a hundred tons/tuns’ relate not to the tonnage of the ship itself or its displacement but to its carrying capacity of twenty tuns or large barrels. An alternative approach might be to regard the £2,166 13s 4d here mentioned as the total wages of the mariners in going to England, then Harfleur and back again. If there were 700 ships, with 700 masters paid 6d per day, and each ship had an average of 30 mariners at 3d per day (these being the usual rates in England), then this sum would not quite have covered eight days’ sailing – hardly enough time, one would have thought to sail from Holland and Zeeland to Southampton, and to load up, sail to Harfleur, unload, and return to Holland and Zeeland. There may have been fewer ships. However, there may have been additional payments for wages (this £2,166 was probably a part-payment), and there may have been different wage rates or numbers of sailors.

  84. See also the council meeting discussing these, on 15 May. Nicolas (ed.), Privy Council, ii, p. 159.

  85. CPR, pp. 306–7.

  86. These payments are on the Issue Roll for this day: E 403/621.

  87. Loomis (ed.), Constance, pp. 237–8.

  88. Foedera, ix, p. 205.

  89. CPR, p. 302.

  90. CPR, p. 343.

  91. Foedera, ix, p. 228.

  92. Foedera, ix, pp. 235–8.

  93. Curry, Agincourt, p. 67.

  94. Curry, Agincourt, p. 27. There could have been as many as two thousand archers at St-Cloud, but no more.

  95. Wylie, Henry V, i, p. 479.

  May

  1. From this point, 1 May, certain details noted in the Issue Rolls and other official records have been relegated to the notes. This is because they are worthy of inclusion in order to present as full a record of Henry’s activities as possible but in their respective dates they disrupt the flow of the narrative, reducing the readability – and thus the accessibility – of the text. Today, for instance, the Close Rolls note an order to Henry Kays to pay 20 marks annually to the priory of the Virgin and St Thomas the Martyr at Newark, Surrey (CCR, p. 211). This was followed on 3 May by a related order to deliver letters patent freeing the same priory from tenths and fifteenths. Today a commission was also issued to arrest Gilbert Hesketh esquire of Chester. Hesketh was to be brought immediately before the king and council in chancery (CPR, p. 346). What Hesketh had done to deserve this is unknown, but it is unlikely to have been a serious offence, and possibly was not an offence at all. Hesketh sailed on the forthcoming expedition in the company of Sir William Butler (Nicolas, Agincourt, p. 357), and the following year the king granted him and his mother the wardship of his (Hesketh’s) under-age cousin (DL 25/1649).